Transducer type and mounting - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Small Boat Electrical
  Transducer type and mounting

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Transducer type and mounting

crusty crab posted 02-09-2006 10:21 AM ET (US)
I'm looking to install a Raymarine fishfinder and wonder if anyone has experience mounting the transducers for these models. They have a through hull model as well as stern mount. Anyone install the through-hull? At 1kW tor the through-hull compared to 600watts for the stern mount is there much difference in performance? Is there much difference in performance from through-hulls to stern-mounts? Between through-hull locations?
My boat is a 1988 Outrage 25 with twins.
Thanks!
deepwater posted 02-09-2006 12:14 PM ET (US)
hey cc look i cant even think about ever cutting a hole in the bottom of my 17, but ask the dealer or who makes the fishfinder if there is a limit on how thick the hull can be ,, most through hull fittings come together and act as a clamp ,squeezing the unit together ,all you have to do is find a place thin enough and no wires or hoses /cables
crusty crab posted 02-09-2006 01:06 PM ET (US)
The through-hull model is very thick and has a fairing attachment. It could easily go through the livewell areas of the whaler hull. I'm mainly looking to see if there is experience with these transducers vis-a-vis are they worth putting a hole through the boat hull as compared to putting holes in the boat transom.

jimh posted 02-10-2006 01:10 AM ET (US)
If you haul your boat with a trailer, keep that in mind if installing a through-hull transducer. Its location will have to not interfere with any gear on the trailer.
bsmotril posted 02-10-2006 09:24 AM ET (US)
All things being perfect with the installation, the through hull will perform better. But, it is easy to screw up either installation. The quality of the return signal is directly related to the care in choosing the installation location, and fairing or locating the transducer to minimize aerated water flowing across its' face. The benefit of the transom mount is that it is easy to adjust the depth or loaction of the transducer face if your first installation has problems. Not so with the through hull. I'm not familiar enough with your hull to comment on a location for a through hull. But, I did have a transom mount for a Raymarine on a Conquest with twins that worked fine at all speeds, and even while turning tightly. Pictures of the install here:
http://home.austin.rr.com/smohome/new_conquest23.htm
BillS
bigjohn1 posted 02-11-2006 08:00 AM ET (US)
For what its worth, I have a 600w unit with transom-mount transducer on a 170 MONTAUK. I use it almost exclusively in A-Scope mode which gives you real-time echo returns as opposed to "historical" you get in auto mode. Of course my unit is not as good as a 1kW unit running a thru-hull transducer but I have no trouble getting great fish returns and keeping the bottom at all but WOT speeds. It will be much less hassle to install a transom-mount transducer and it will give you great performance as long as you pick the correct installation location. I have no idea where that optimum location would be on an '88 Outrage but I'm sure someone here knows.
crusty crab posted 02-11-2006 12:59 PM ET (US)
Thanks for the great advice guys. I think I will go with the transom mount based on your advice.
BigMoney posted 02-19-2006 04:52 PM ET (US)
You may have already made up your mind, but I figured I'd share my experience here, too... The transducer choice really all depends on what you plan on using your fishfinder for.. If you're going to be bottom fishing in 30 - 150 feet of water, a 500 or 600w transom mount 'ducer will be way more than you'll ever need. Mounted in the proper place (which may take trial and error) you can easily track bottom in depths up to a few hundred feet at speeds above 30 mph in saltwater with a 500w tm 'ducer...
However, if you're going to be, for example, sword fishing or deep dropping and want to see bottom in 1000+ feet, you need a thru-hull 1kw transducer to get to the bottom in salt water. I have a 170 montauk with a 500w Airmar P66 transducer hooked up to a Raymarine DS-500x, and I can see bottom reliably up to 1000 feet. I'm not marking any bottom contour, though, so at that depth it's pretty much just a depth finder and not a fishfinder. A 1kw ducer would likely produce a more accurate picture of the bottom at those depths... On my new 27, I'm having a 1 kw thru-hull mounted to hook up to my new Furuno 1kw sender, but like it has been mentioned here, you have to pay a little more attention when pulling up onto your trailer with a thru-hull.
I have run several fish finders from simple humminbird 100w models to furuno 2kw models, and they all work fine for their intended use. Without knowing exactly what you're going to be using it for, it's hard to make a recommendation..

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Transducer type and mounting
crusty crab	posted 02-09-2006 10:21 AM ET (US) I'm looking to install a Raymarine fishfinder and wonder if anyone has experience mounting the transducers for these models. They have a through hull model as well as stern mount. Anyone install the through-hull? At 1kW tor the through-hull compared to 600watts for the stern mount is there much difference in performance? Is there much difference in performance from through-hulls to stern-mounts? Between through-hull locations? My boat is a 1988 Outrage 25 with twins. Thanks!
deepwater	posted 02-09-2006 12:14 PM ET (US) hey cc look i cant even think about ever cutting a hole in the bottom of my 17, but ask the dealer or who makes the fishfinder if there is a limit on how thick the hull can be ,, most through hull fittings come together and act as a clamp ,squeezing the unit together ,all you have to do is find a place thin enough and no wires or hoses /cables
crusty crab	posted 02-09-2006 01:06 PM ET (US) The through-hull model is very thick and has a fairing attachment. It could easily go through the livewell areas of the whaler hull. I'm mainly looking to see if there is experience with these transducers vis-a-vis are they worth putting a hole through the boat hull as compared to putting holes in the boat transom.
jimh	posted 02-10-2006 01:10 AM ET (US) If you haul your boat with a trailer, keep that in mind if installing a through-hull transducer. Its location will have to not interfere with any gear on the trailer.
bsmotril	posted 02-10-2006 09:24 AM ET (US) All things being perfect with the installation, the through hull will perform better. But, it is easy to screw up either installation. The quality of the return signal is directly related to the care in choosing the installation location, and fairing or locating the transducer to minimize aerated water flowing across its' face. The benefit of the transom mount is that it is easy to adjust the depth or loaction of the transducer face if your first installation has problems. Not so with the through hull. I'm not familiar enough with your hull to comment on a location for a through hull. But, I did have a transom mount for a Raymarine on a Conquest with twins that worked fine at all speeds, and even while turning tightly. Pictures of the install here: http://home.austin.rr.com/smohome/new_conquest23.htm BillS
bigjohn1	posted 02-11-2006 08:00 AM ET (US) For what its worth, I have a 600w unit with transom-mount transducer on a 170 MONTAUK. I use it almost exclusively in A-Scope mode which gives you real-time echo returns as opposed to "historical" you get in auto mode. Of course my unit is not as good as a 1kW unit running a thru-hull transducer but I have no trouble getting great fish returns and keeping the bottom at all but WOT speeds. It will be much less hassle to install a transom-mount transducer and it will give you great performance as long as you pick the correct installation location. I have no idea where that optimum location would be on an '88 Outrage but I'm sure someone here knows.
crusty crab	posted 02-11-2006 12:59 PM ET (US) Thanks for the great advice guys. I think I will go with the transom mount based on your advice.
BigMoney	posted 02-19-2006 04:52 PM ET (US) You may have already made up your mind, but I figured I'd share my experience here, too... The transducer choice really all depends on what you plan on using your fishfinder for.. If you're going to be bottom fishing in 30 - 150 feet of water, a 500 or 600w transom mount 'ducer will be way more than you'll ever need. Mounted in the proper place (which may take trial and error) you can easily track bottom in depths up to a few hundred feet at speeds above 30 mph in saltwater with a 500w tm 'ducer... However, if you're going to be, for example, sword fishing or deep dropping and want to see bottom in 1000+ feet, you need a thru-hull 1kw transducer to get to the bottom in salt water. I have a 170 montauk with a 500w Airmar P66 transducer hooked up to a Raymarine DS-500x, and I can see bottom reliably up to 1000 feet. I'm not marking any bottom contour, though, so at that depth it's pretty much just a depth finder and not a fishfinder. A 1kw ducer would likely produce a more accurate picture of the bottom at those depths... On my new 27, I'm having a 1 kw thru-hull mounted to hook up to my new Furuno 1kw sender, but like it has been mentioned here, you have to pay a little more attention when pulling up onto your trailer with a thru-hull. I have run several fish finders from simple humminbird 100w models to furuno 2kw models, and they all work fine for their intended use. Without knowing exactly what you're going to be using it for, it's hard to make a recommendation..